The Wildland/New Urbanist Interface

In the middle of a triple digit heat wave in July, I found refuge from the afternoon sun at a busy conference about how to build more livable, sustainable communities in the west. One of the keynote speakers, David Orr, talked about global climate change as we Missoulians sought respite from its immediate effects in any cool, air-conditioned place we could find.

Making the Connection

Global climate change and the end of the oil era were two of the underlying, global threats that attendees of this conference were  addressing. And while these topics have received much attention lately, what I found most interesting was the way conference presenters linked them to local issues and local solutions. For example, both of these global threats are being exacerbated through “out of control sprawl [that] is devouring prime farmlands and pristine wilderness, and creating massive traffic congestion” (http://www.newurbanism.org/newurbanism.html).

While this conference was focused on building livable communities that maintain the things people love about the west, the conference itself was a part of the growing “new urbanism” movement (even though much western development is rural, as opposed to urban). This international movement is aimed at rebuilding livable cities, towns, villages and neighborhoods that integrate housing, parks/nature, schools, businesses, entertainment and other aspects of life into manageable and accessible systems for residents, without being so dependent on cars.

Transportation needs are a primary focus of new urbanism as described on the website newurbanism.org. The first solution they propose to the problems mentioned above (in a list of ten steps) is: “an immediate and permanent moratorium an all new major road construction and expansions.” Clearly there is a close link between the work we’re doing and the work they’re doing, though we focus on wildlands, and they focus on the built environment.

While reading about new urbanism, I was reminded of Wildlands CPR’s inception, as a project of an organization (Alliance for a Paving Moratorium (APM)) that was working to prevent sprawl to address the coming challenges from the end of the oil age. In effect, we grew out of the new urbanism movement. As we became an independent organization, however, Wildlands CPR focused our work on wildlands, not the urban growth and road issues that APM worked on. But now we’ve come full circle, with our restoration program partnering with activists working on community revitalization — restoring the natural link between wildlands, watersheds and the built environment.

Looking in the Mirror

Some of our colleagues question why we make this link, why we’ve expanded our work to incorporate human communities and wildlands. In defining themselves/ourselves as “biocentric,” many conservationists have omitted the human element. But in Wildlands CPR’s perspective, the two are integrally linked. Too often conservation/environmental work gets separated from human communities and human concerns, and environmentalists are accused of caring more about trees than people. This schism fueled the “jobs versus the environment” conflict, and some of our most vociferous opponents.

In our restoration work we are acknowledging the link between communities and wildlands, especially the link between communities and the watersheds that sustain them. For example, sixty million people in 3,400 American communities get their drinking water from Forest Service lands, so watershed restoration can help improve drinking water supplies, among other benefits. Our restoration program also highlights the high-wage, high-skill jobs created in rural communities through watershed restoration efforts like road removal. But even more jobs can be created when we also revitalize the human/built environment in local
communities.

Folks working in new urbanism refer regularly to revitalization, whether that means cleaning up and converting an old “Brownfield” site into affordto revitalization, whether that means cleaning up and converting an old “Brownfield” site into affordable housing, or renovating abandoned or decrepit inner city buildings into shops, housing, community centers, etc. Even neighborhood gardens can be a form of revitalization. But, of course, folks working in new urbanism focus on urban areas, while most of Wildlands CPR’s restoration focuses on rural areas. And while some of the principles of new urbanism
apply in rural areas, others do not, as there just isn’t the concentration of people to support critical services like public transit. But revitalization of the built environment in rural areas still makes sense as a way to maintain livable rural communities, as promoted by groups like the Center for Rural Affairs or the Institute for Rural America (even if these groups haven’t quite created a a commensurate, international “new ruralism” movement).

New urbanists focus on what people need, and on how to build sustainable, livable communities that cause less damage to the environment. New urbanists recognize the link between restoration and revitalization. In their stated principles, they describe an approach called “transect planning.” The result of such planning is that, “the professional boundary between the natural and man-made disappears, enabling environmentalists to assess the design of the human habitat and the urbanists to support the viability of nature.” New urbanists are regularly linking back to nature conservation, yet conservationists only infrequently make the reciprocal link.

Wouldn’t it be more strategic for conservationists to consider this link, and to address human habitat and human needs as we also try to protect and restore watersheds and wildlands? We should clearly articulate the values and benefits of restoration and revitalization to those from whom we need support — namely, people. It’s just this approach that resulted in significant new financial investment ($34 million) in restoration in the state of Montana this year (see related article on page 2). From a people perspective, advocates for this funding talked about job creation; worker training programs; research programs at the University level; clean drinking water and improved hunting opportunities. However, fish and wildlife and their habitats were also real winners in this effort.

Thinking Globally

New urbanists are particularly concerned about global climate change and peak oil. While they are focusing on dramatically changed urban design as a way to reduce the production of greenhouse gasses, restoration provides some opportunities to enhance the capacity of our watersheds to withstand the unknown impacts of global climate change. Basically, the healthier our watersheds are, the more resilient they will be in the face of climate change, potentially providing critical habitat connectivity as habitat changes throughout the world. So restoration work provides a way to reduce the pending effects of global climate change, not just to address its already-realized impacts.

Acting Locally

Fully restoring wildlands and watersheds will inherently benefit the rural communities situated adjacent to those efforts. Integrating restoration with community revitalization will dramatically enhance those benefits. We can learn a lot from how new urbanists define problems and offer solutions. We can continue to incorporate community revitalization into our restoration work, and vice versa, creating a new paradigm for rural living, with parellels to that proposed for urban living. And we can also recognize that rural living should remain rural and limited. As new urbanists revitalize our cities and make them desirable places to live again, perhaps fewer people will move into wildlands, thus reducing sprawl as well as problems in the wildland/urban interface.

Restoration and revitalization are happening all over the world, in a plethora of venues. With climate change bearing down on all of us, these efforts provide some hope. To foment more hope, conservation groups can and should partner with new urbanist and rural advocates and planners, to work the seam between our cities, rural areas and wildlands, and we should look for new opportunities to support each other’s work. Next time we have a month-long, triple-digit heat-wave, I hope to take respite in a restored stream, running clean and cold, right towards town, where I can muse about the connections our work has to other issues as well.